(Zombie thread from 2002) 558 hopes dashed ?

I have done so, and it is a most excellant thread. The a/c can only be in the colourings of it service life in the RAFso say the HLF.
Personally I don’t mind the Vixen colour scheme, good for them down in Hurn.

The HLF want only the civil reg of the aircraft added to the airframe, to keep it part of the cold war era

Disregarding the obvious point that adding a civvy reg does not keep it part of the Cold War era, I suggest you need to read the excellent post on the Red Bull Vixen thread from the operator as to why it is painted in commercial colours.

Moggy

With respect – something that SHOULD have been thought about when sustainability was considered.

For inclusivity – see OW – friendly atmosphere – people falling over themselves to help out, great comms, good magazine- just the other day a mailshot confirming that the SVAS financial team had managed to secure a giftaid allowance from HMG – excellent letter, pre-printed envelope, promise to keep updated – THATS how it should be done.

In any event, Kev and I will be available for PR Consultancy basis for considerably less than Marshall’s hourly rate. – that alright with you Kev?

TT

The HLF want only the civil reg of the aircraft added to the airframe, to keep it part of the cold war era. Not withstanding we could get away with the inside ofthe bomb bay doors after the first season as a past promo was to have your name on the bomb bay door for £40.
But yes – why have the 100 or so OEM not been given the change to promote there companies involement in a book, flyer or poster. Something to think about.

These have probably already been thought of but ,how about writing to the big multi million pound companies whose products the Vulcan will be using,Fuel,Oil,Lubricants,Insurance,Tyres,ask them for £10.000 [flexible]or so each for advertising around/on the aircraft,see how the racing teams get sponsorship.
What about a dvd bought out for the history of XH558 and the behind the scenes and training involved and the rebuild.

What approach would you like VTTS to be like. Lets stand up and flex our wings, its our money being used here on this project.

1. Complete financial transparency. This means telling exactly how much they currently expect it will take to get 558 back into the air.

2. How much it will cost to maintain 558 in an airworthy condition for the first display season? And then the same at regular intervals for consecutive seasons.

3. TT’s point about inclusivity. Make more people feel welcome to be a part of the project. This means abolishing the £50 per peek farce.

4. Hold open days with visitor attractions which will generate income. A few thousand people through the gate spending money and making (uncoerced) donations will probably generate more income than ‘it’s yours, but if you want to see it it’ll cost you £50!’

5. A more open approach to fundraising. Try the scattergun approach. They might drop luckier that way as TT has already indicated.

6. Please stop the patronising and condescending tone of the press releases. VTTS are talking to people donating their hard earned cash and they have stated on their website that they admit some have probably donated more than they can afford, in a really paronising tone. There’s a phrase, “much wants more” and that is how VTTS are appearing.

Somebody else can have a go now….

Edited to say TT beat me to it.

Regards,

kev35

Sounds good to me –

Acting for the PUBLIC
Open to the PUBLIC
Friendly, welcoming, grateful (!), not secretive
inclusive, better publicity, constant updates, transparency, accounts and accountability.
Costs so far spent, anticipated expenditure.

Above all – TRANSPARENCY.

TT

What approach would you like VTTS to be like. Lets stand up and flex our wings, its our money being used here on this project.

hase everyone forgotten, it ain’t £500,000

in some respects the £500k is the easy bit. It is the 100% uplift in contractors cost” that seems to have eluded a lot of the readeship, that is the big problem.

anyway, if someone wants to be actively involved in a vintage aircraft which will fly come and help me and Texantomcat build a T-6 and/or a Beech 18………and btw it will only cost them the value of a car sticker £1.00 or a patch £7.50 and maybe a pint or 2 at the end of a very productive, no-secretive day……we won’t keep asking the supporter club, nation, any tom dick or harry for more money every five mins.

come on, no money involved, just hard work…………… any body

the silence is deafening isn’t it Ben

Quite –

but not to deflect matters away from the thread as many forumites DO do their bit for vintage aircraft…

Anyway back to the Vulcan

TT

stop thinking of the public as ‘customers’ for a start!

TT

hase everyone forgotten, it ain’t £500,000

in some respects the £500k is the easy bit. It is the 100% uplift in contractors cost” that seems to have eluded a lot of the readeship, that is the big problem.

anyway, if someone wants to be actively involved in a vintage aircraft which will fly come and help me and Texantomcat build a T-6 and/or a Beech 18………and btw it will only cost them the value of a car sticker £1.00 or a patch £7.50 and maybe a pint or 2 at the end of a very productive, no-secretive day……we won’t keep asking the supporter club, nation, any tom dick or harry for more money every five mins.

come on, no money involved, just hard work…………… any body

the silence is deafening isn’t it Ben

So what should they do to improve there customer services?

Kev – I think we’re on the same page here mate 🙂

I have personal reasons for not liking VTS very much and having been on site at Brunters before and after she was bought for the nation. Ahem. Have seen nothing to dissuade me from my views of secrecy, distrust and high-handedness, but i stand by my post above – at least in theory we should all be behind the return to flight of a vintage aeroplane – but it is the manner in which, the cost involved and the apparent mismanagement of the project which perhaps leaves us with a bad taste in the mouth.

TT

TT.

Amid suitable fanfare VTTS announced that that the Vulcan had been ‘bought for the Nation.’ And then they go and secrete the aircraft away in a Hangar and charge you £50 to go and look at it. That is surely a complete contradiction? Parents buy their son or daughter a car for their 18th or 21st birthday. What a wonderful gift. However, I’ve yet to hear a case of those parents charging their child for the privelege of using it. It may be a poor analogy but you get my point.

My reasons for not wanting to see the Vulcan fly have been made clear on several occasions. Of late, it seems the most effective supporters of those who do not wish to see the Vulcan fly again are VTTS themselves.

Regards,

kev35

Regarding the lack of sponsorship. You only need 100 Companies or individuals to invest £5,000 each. That’s pocket money to an awful lot of Companies and to a fair number of individuals. Perhaps instead of asking a few for a lot of money they should ask a lot of Companies for considerably less.

Regards,

kev35

Yep, they should. They should be expolring every single avenue with this. With regards to me, I have donated a lot and will continue to until we get a green or red light. Sadly, I can’t afford a loan as i’ve just got a house, but between £20-£50 a month, well….

Kev – spot on.

I think the VTS view is a case of ‘help’ and waiting for a white knight with a large chequebook – whether that be Mr Branston or a large American concern. What is certain that one cheque will not cover it. It seems that longer term committment and regular injections of folding to deal with ‘contingencies’ is required. Whether someone wants to take on that kind of liability is another matter.

This is just to get her in the air, never mind OPERATING her – oh and the inevitable question – if and when she gets to DX what will happen to the resident vulcan already there.

Kevs £5k ‘fire and forget’ support is much more useful and likely to bear fruit – of course it is EASIER to expect a large slice of the cake than to hunt down many hundreds of firms to equal the amount.

What is interesting IMHO – is the way the whole thing has polarised the opinion on what you might call the aviation ‘enthusiast’ or ‘community’ – one would have thought that all of us would have been 110% behind them, so one has to ask ‘why’?. Is it the publicity or attitude of VTS as aloof/secretive/disorganised? £50 simply to SEE the beastie seems an awful lot to Mr Public (you nearly get 2 Legends tickets for that) whose money has gone into her in the first place.

If this uplift has been imposed, one wonders why the contract permitted that in the first place!

If inclusivity was required then exclusivity and secrecy has been the result – IMHO. It seems churlish to ‘blame’ someone – Marshalls? VTS? HLF? Individuals? but it seems to me that the ‘view’ is one of anger/despair and mistrust. Its bloody difficult to reverse that sentiment I think.

TT

Sorry, I don’t believe you.

If you really mean that it could be the start of a good idea.

Advertise your eye teeth on e-bay, stating clearly what the money will be used for.

Push out press releases to all the TV stations, radio, newspapers and add some viral marketing. It is the sort of story that will get lots of coverage

You’ll almost certainly end up being interviewed at which point you can expose the appeal to a vast audience.

Once the winner pays up it’s off to the dentist you go.

Now let’s hear the excuses.

Moggy

Moggy, if by having some teeth removed I could gaurantee the Vulcan would fly I would do so. I would even let you name the teeth.

Isn’t there some kind of benefit for Companies or individuals who donate sums to Charities? If so, would that not be a useful incentive to use when VTTS approach them? I may be wrong but I always thought there was some kind of benefit attached to charitable donations like this.

Regards,

kev35

Regarding the lack of sponsorship. You only need 100 Companies or individuals to invest £5,000 each. That’s pocket money to an awful lot of Companies and to a fair number of individuals. Perhaps instead of asking a few for a lot of money they should ask a lot of Companies for considerably less.

Regards,

kev35

I totally agree with Kev35 on this.